Edit This Favorite

Name:

Category:

Share:

YesNo, Keep Private

SINGLE AND COLLABORATIVE SMALL RESEARCH GRANTS: APPLY NOW!

The Executive Committee of SPR is delighted to announce the fifth year of the Small Research Awards program, this time for the 2017-2018 academic year (September 1, 2017 to August 31, 2018). The due date for submitting the application online will be December 1, 2016. A maximum of 4 single and 2 collaborative research awards, each with a maximum value of $2500 and $5000, respectively. This grants will be made annually to SPR members (regular/retired and student members) who are in good standing within the Society, across SPR chapters.

Applications should address research questions specifically pertaining to psychotherapy research, such as processes and outcome, methodological developments (data analysis, instruments, diagnostics, etc.), and the training/supervision of psychotherapists.

Only projects that are in the planning stages or are ongoing at the time of application will be considered. That is, completed research projects will not be eligible. The awards are specifically designed to aid investigators complete small pilot projects that are expected to provide data for future, larger projects. In general the project should be clearly capable of being completed to the time scale proposed and within the budget applied for and that budget should be justified.

Awards may be used to purchase supplies (including instruments, equipment, postage, photocopying, software, etc.); to pay coders, research, or technical assistants; and to remunerate client or therapist participants. Awards may not be used for travelling expenses to present at conferences, but travel funds may be reimbursed if travel is necessary to collect data. It is not necessary to specify every last dollar but applications that are vague or fail to make the costing convincing will not be supported. In general only work that fits within the funds applied for from SPR will be funded, such as small pilot projects or well-delimited sub-studies. Applications that ask for funds primarily to complement other funds will not be supported.

A Review Committee, comprised of members from each SPR chapter, is nominated by each chapter’s President. This Review Committee will evaluate proposals and make recommendations for funding to the Executive Committee. To the extent possible, the intent is to seek balance in awardees across chapters and membership categories.

This year’s grant applications are due December 1, 2016 to this year’s Review Committee Chair, Nelson Valdés. The Review Committee’s recommended awardees will be submitted to the Executive Committee for final approval by April 15, 2017, and award recipients will be notified after they have been approved by the Committee. The awards will be announced at the next annual SPR International Meeting.

Grantees will receive their awards through a Responsible Authority (university or other institution). Please note that no indirect costs will be granted to the awardee’s institution. All funds must be spent by August 31, 2018. A Final Report will be due to the SPR Executive Committee by February 1, 2019.

Application Process

The application should be submitted electronically to the Research Awards Review Committee Chair, Nelson Valdés nlvaldes@uc.cl. The application includes an Abstract (limited to 250 words), a summary of the proposed project (limited to 1500 words), an abbreviated Curriculum Vitae (CV), the total budget for the project, and the proposed timeline for completion of the research. Student members must, in addition, submit an Evaluation Form (included in application) from the responsible supervising faculty member.

For all applications (regular/retired and student member), the applicant must be in good standing with the Society (i.e., current year’s dues paid, as well as past dues, if applicable). Thus, the applicants should be members of the Society and their dues paid for the year of application, this time for 2016. For both regular/retired and student members, priority will be given to applications that are submitted with documentation from the applicant’s institutional review board (ethics committee) that the proposed project has been approved or a waiver of IRB (ethics committee) review from the Responsible Authority, i.e., University or other Institution. Secondary priority will be given to applications with pending institutional review board approval. Student applications without approval documentation must be accompanied by a clear statement from the supervisor confirming that no problems with institutional review board approval are expected.

Single or groups of grantees are not eligible to receive an additional, new grant from SPR within the same membership category (i.e., regular/retired members or student members) within a 5-year period from the date of receipt of the initial award. The only exception is the following: a student grantee may receive a new grant within 5 years if she or he has become a regular SPR member in good standing.

Evaluation Criteria

The Awards Committee will evaluate each proposal along the following criteria:

Importance or significance of the topic to the field

Clarity and quality of the research methodology and analyses that will be conducted

Appropriateness of the budget

Feasibility of completing the project within one year

Prospects for continuation of work building on the pilot project (if applicable) and for future funding

Final Report

The Final Report concerning the outcomes of the project, due to SPR’s Executive Officer by February 1 of the year following the end of the award (February 1, 2018), must include the following:

The extent to which the original aims as stated in the application have been achieved;

The work you undertook in relation to this project;

Any publications and presentations that have resulted from this work; and

Any related subsequent grant awards.

Furthermore, the awardees have to provide an account for research funds from the responsible authority (University or other institution).

Application Materials

All applications must be submitted electronically in the order noted below in one document in PDF format:

Application cover sheet

Abstract (maximum 250 words)

Project Description (maximum 1500 words, exclusive of references)

Timeline of proposed activities/work schedule

Itemized budget, with justification as indicated on the Budget form

A letter (or e-mail to the applicant) from the applicant’s institutional review board indicating that the proposal has been approved or has been submitted and is awaiting approval (if approval is required by the applicant’s institution or country). Letters of approval should indicate the start and end dates of the project. For students, the Faculty Evaluation Form should indicate whether any problems with institutional review board approval are expected.

Abbreviated curriculum vitae (CV); 5 pages maximum, focusing on the applicant’s major research activities (presentations, publications, works in progress) within the past 5 years. Students’ CVs should indicate educational status (e.g., master’s student, doctoral candidate). In case of a Collaborative Research, the application must include the CVs of all the researchers of the group.

For students: Faculty Evaluation Forms must be submitted electronically in PDF format to the Awards Committee Chair (nlvaldes@uc.cl) separately from the student’s application. Students should provide the advisor with their application and with the e-mail address of the Chair of the Awards Committee. Student applications lacking a Faculty Evaluation Form will not be considered.

The Project Description should not exceed 1500 words, single-spaced (exclusive of references, tables, and figures). The narrative should include the major research questions, the specific objectives of the study, the research methodology, the preliminary work already accomplished (if applicable), the anticipated significance to the field, and any supporting evidence regarding the likelihood of continuation of work building on the pilot project and future funding (if applicable). It is particularly important that applications specify analysis of the data collected sufficiently to convince raters that the project will be completed to an ethical and publishable standard. Quantitative projects should address sample size, power/effect sizes and use of confidence intervals to complement or replace hypothesis testing and should spell out aims leading to specific hypotheses or effects/models to be explored and the particular statistical and/or psychometric methods to be used. Qualitative projects should say what methods of exploration of the data will be used and how the chain of evidence and its plausibility and value will be conveyed in the report.

It is very important to explain why the researchers chose to apply as a group rather than individually. This justification is part of the nature of the project and will be an important criterion for the selection.